HomeMy WebLinkAbout20060986.tiff SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Tuesday, February 21, 2006
A regular meeting of the Weld County Planning Commission was held in the Southwest Weld County
Conference Room, 4209 CR 24.5, Longmont, Colorado. The meeting was called to order by Chair, Bruce
Fitzgerald, at 1:30 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Michael Miller
Bruce Fitzgerald
Tom Holton
Chad Auer
Doug Ochsner
James Welch Absent
Roy Spitzer
Erich Ehrlich Absent
Paul Branham
Also Present: Don Carroll, Char Davis, Pam Smith, Michelle Martin, Brad Mueller, Frank Hempen, Monica
Mika
The summary of the last regular meeting of the Weld County Planning Commission held on February 7,2006,
was approved as read.
The following case is on the Consent Agenda:
CASE NUMBER: USR-1542
APPLICANT: Lance&Cheryl Messinger
PLANNER: Michelle Martin
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot A of RE-4133, part NE4 of Section 31, T3N, R66W of the 6th P.M.,
Weld County, Colorado.
REQUEST: Site Specific Development Plan and Special Review Permit for mineral
resource development facilities including oil & gas support and service
facility(storage of oilfield equipment) in the A(Agricultural)Zone District.
LOCATION: West of and adjacent to State Hwy 85 and north of CR 26.5.
Doug Ochsner moved to approve the Consent Agenda. Michael Miller seconded.
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. Roy
Spitzer,yes; Michael Miller,yes;Tom Holton,yes;Chad Auer,yes;Doug Ochsner,yes;Bruce Fitzgerald,yes;
Paul Branham, yes. Motion carried unanimously.
The following case will be heard:
CASE NUMBER: 2005-XX
APPLICANT: Pioneer Communities, Inc
PLANNER: Brad Mueller
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Within Township 3 North, Range 64 West of the 6'h PM: Section 32; and
within Township 2 North, Range 64 West of the 6`h PM.:SW4 of Section
4, E2 of Section 5, Sections 7 &8, most of Section 9, most of W2 Section
17 and N2 &SE4 of Section 18; and , within Township 2 North, Range 65
West of the 6th PM,: Section 2, E2 of Section 11, most of Section 12, N2
of Section 13 and parts of Section 14 & 15, Weld County Colorado, being
5,667 acres, more or less.
REQUEST: Amendment to the Weld County Comprehensive Plan and the Mixed Use
Development area plan to create a new urban Mixed Use Development
Ct-11% .Ct -3Y'E 2006-0986
area on approximately 5,667 acres on the property described above.
LOCATION: Approximately 3-4 miles north of the Town of Hudson
Brad Mueller, Department of Planning Services, presented Case 2005-XX, reading the recommendation
and comments into the record. The Department of Planning Services is recommending denial of the
application. Mr. Mueller presented a PowerPoint presentation. A request is for the creation of a new
urban Mixed Use Development("MUD")area and the mechanics of this are to adopt a new Structural
Land Use Map, to adopt a new Structural Land Use Categories and to adopt Goal & Policies (Chapter 22)
that would support that map as well as the Development Standards (Chapter 26). This would be done by
revising Chapters 22 and 26 of the Weld County Code. The Comprehensive Plan is the foundation for
future land use and planning and it is used for the creation of policy and laws. State Statute describes the
Comprehensive Plan as the document to determine the general location & character of development.
State Statute requires the adoption of the Comprehensive Plan. Comprehensive Planning is not zoning
and it is does not subdivide land into lots or buildable parcels. A map of the proposed development was
presented along with the location. The major roadways systems map was also presented. The net area
of this development is approximately 5667 acres with approximately 4200 acres of non-agricultural land.
The legal noticing was done in the Fort Lupton press as well as a press release to the media agencies and
a surrounding property mail out of adjoining neighbors within 1500 feet from the site. Additional photos
were provided of the site. The criteria the Planning Commission must consider before amending the
Comprehensive Plan. Key features include the following: is there a need for the amendment,whether the
amendment is consistent with existing goals and policies and the whether the various goals and policies
that are associated with the mixed use development area are applicable. The Comprehensive Plan has
extensive sections on the guiding principles and foundations for land use. Urban growth is addressed
acknowledging the balance between private property rights and community rights. The Comprehensive
Plan speaks to the direction of growth where there are services within existing municipalities, and the
concept of a sustainable community. The submittal included specifics such as dwelling units of 10,000
units, which would be a population of approximately 25, 000 people. Traffic generated by this is estimated
to be around 92,500 vehicles trips per day. There would be road expansions such as four lanes on CR 49
to the north, four lanes of CR 22 to the west and potentially six lanes of CR 49 from CR 22 south to I -76.
There are a number of demands for commutersheds. The site includes floodplain and drainage areas
such as Box Elder Creek. There are also limited geological hazards; the soil conditions are sandy and
erosive. Specific agricultural uses are initially proposed for preservation. Central water is proposed to
supply the site, the demand for the units would be approximately 6100 acre feet (a/f) per year. The source
of the water will be via Metropolitan Districts that have been proposed and conditionally approved. These
are quasi governmental entities set up for taxing through property taxes. The Pioneer Metropolitan District
would contract with the Resource Colorado Metropolitan District and the actual source of water would be
23%from Denver Basin, 36%from Lost Creek/Prospect Valley, and 40%from the Box Elder Alluvium.
There will be return flows that will be used to augment agricultural uses downstream, which is significant.
However, there has been no information provided as to what those amounts would be. The proposal is to
have central sewer. Emergency services are proposed through the existing districts which are currently
volunteers. One future condition is the creation of a Law Enforcement Agency, which would add to the
property taxes a levy of 7 mills. Residential units will range from approximately 7,300 to 12,400 dwelling
units, with a density of 1.7 du/ac to 2.9 du/ac. This is recognized as low to semi-rural density. The
commercial element would include 200,000 sq. ft., which is the size of four supermarkets, and would take
place on approximately 270 acres. Employment opportunities from the site would come from construction
& retail associated with the commercial. There are no employment centers identified. The economic
impacts of this proposal are not defined at this point, nor are the impacts to the surrounding towns and the
consequences of those. There was an independent impact study done at the recommendation of Mr.
Warden, Weld County Finance Director. Leland Consulting Group did this study and the conclusion of it
was that the taxes received from this proposal would not be enough to cover the cost of the services
provided by Weld County. The deficit would be 5 million dollars over the length of the project. This
represents a deficit outside of the contributions from the Metropolitan Districts. The site is proposed to be
served by the Weld RE-3J school district. At build-out this would require eight elementary schools, two
middle schools and two high schools. At build-out there would be approximately 10,000 dwelling units with
a population of 25, 000 people and the development would be finished approximately in 2025. A
Structural Land Use Map has been provided identifying the agricultural and residential uses. Growth
along Interstate 76 is fundamental for the proposal and the development of urban scale development in
the corridor. There are some parallels to the I-25 corridor at the inception. Staff has done a limited study
2
looking at the characteristics of land and development in the 1-76 Corridor. There was a pattern of a very
diverse development. The pattern in this area is varied and has taken place incrementally over the prior
years. Growth is coming to this area according to the State Demographer. They have spoken about the
quantity of development and the future population. However this does not predict where the development
is to take place. The question is what type of development pattern would be encouraged in the corridor.
This proposal and any consideration by the Planning Commission need to look at the quality of
development, which is the land use pattern at a large scale and the efficiency of this. This needs to
include things such as roads, water, sewer and smaller necessities such as recreation for the residential
units. In this context, sprawl was reviewed. There are different definitions for sprawl according to different
people. Staff identified sprawl as having four characteristics. One is residential density being low which is
described as six du/ac. Higher density allows for the creation of community. Community means a place
where you can work and play within close proximity. There needs to be appropriate scale of services for
the community. Avoiding sprawl can also mean there is a mixture of homes,jobs and services that create
a cohesive community allowing the residents to avoid long trips for basic services and jobs. There also
needs to be a strong activity center. The street network needs to be accessible.
The criteria in the guiding principles for this application include the following: private & community rights,
existing rights vs. future impacts, agricultural tradition, fair processing, flexibility& impacts, public health,
safety, and welfare and diversity& harmony. These are referenced in Sec. 22-1-120.A—F. The second
set of criteria is referenced in Sec. 22-1-150.6.a and includes the need. The concerns of staff include
identifying a subdivision vs. a community. There were referral agency concerns along with uncertain fiscal
impacts for Weld County and other entities. There were questions on whether this was able to be
completed within the 20 year time frame. The third set of criteria is referenced in Sec. 22-1-150.6.b and
addresses how it applies to the current Comprehensive Plan. The determination of need will be
significant. There is existing zoning throughout Weld County for approximately 400,000 which is also the
projected population for 2025. Additional criteria address the requirement for services. This is addressed
as a mixed use development(MUD)due to the urban nature and amount of acreage. That is the reason
for reviewing the approval criteria for a MUD. This criterion suggests that urban development take place
in one of three areas,which are in existing municipalities, within defined areas around the municipalities or
within the MUD. It would appropriate to create this as a MUD. However this application does not have a
mixture of uses, employment centers or connectivity in comparison to the 1-25 MUD. A broader set of
criteria for the amending the Comprehensive Plan addresses the foundation of future land use. (Sec. 22-
2-20) This includes the quality of life for future residents, urban form,jobs/housing balance and services
&commuting distance. This does not incorporate the 1-76 Corridor and may not protect agriculture, along
with there being growth pressures outside of this area. The expansion policies proposed will allow for
expansion based on limited approval. Agricultural is widely seen as being protected when urban
development is dense and efficient in its use of water. This proposal is not considered dense for an urban
scale. With larger acreage lots the use of water will increase, which takes water from agricultural. The
Comprehensive Plan speaks to urban growth principals such as coordination, incompatible land uses and
urban growth nodes. Staff is recommending denial based on the following: the applicant has not
demonstrated the need, there is sufficient zoning through 2025, and there are uncertainties about build-
out along with referral agency concerns,fiscal impacts to the County, coordination with towns,
infrastructure and impacts of 1-76. Also, there are uncertainty of services including transportation network
/traffic, stormwater, emergency services, schools and the fiscal impact to general County services. The
proposal does not meet criteria of an MUD in that it has no employment center development, no
interconnection of community, inconsistent land use standards with no appropriate zoning mixture.
Finally, the application does not meet Weld vision of land use& urban growth, does not support the
creation of a community; it has characteristics of sprawl, low density, inadequate mixture of uses, no
employment center, no clear activity center and poor accessibility&use of roads.
Should the Planning Commission recommend approval staff suggests the following conditions be applied.
Prior to scheduling before BCC:
a. Revise Chapter 22, incl. additional Department of Public Works
b. Revise Chapter 26, incl. additional Department of Public Works
c. Modify Structural Land Use Map
d. Provide master transportation plan
e. Provide multi-basin master stormwater plan
3
Paul Branham asked for clarification on the deficit and whether that will be cumulative or annually. Mr.
Mueller stated that according to Table 4 of the Leland Report at build-out total new annual revenues to the
county would be 9.6 million with annual service costs to the county of approximately 15 million for an
annual deficit of 5 million.
Chris Paulson, representative for applicant, provided additional information on the proposal. Pioneer is
excited about the opportunity to try and bring a broad comprehensive vision along the southeast Weld
County corridor. The principles have extensive experience in planning and master plan communities.
There are several representatives that will be available to assist in questions. The applicant does not
agree with all the characterizations from staff. The applicant has shown that there was not a deficit but did
show a positive effect but there will be no definite conclusion until completion. The applicant has modified
the plan due to input from referral agencies. The applicant would remain sensitive to the surrounding
communities. This is not an attempt to drop an isolated community into the southern portion of the county.
This would ignore the existing services and the urban aspects of the area. They want the community, as
it grows, to be partner in the community. This is the reason no large proposal for commercial was made,
the expectation is for Hudson and Keenesburg to develop. The vision of how the community grows will
need to be included with the surrounding municipalities. This fits in with the communities as long as they
realize there will be growth in the community.
Jack Reutzel, representative for applicant, provided additional information on the planning aspects and
provided a PowerPoint presentation that will summarize the application. There are fundamental
differences that the applicant has with staff. There are three or four of them regarding the analysis, and
the recommendation. The applicant agrees with staff on the beginning of what a Comprehensive Plan is.
The applicant agrees that this is not zoning nor is it subdivision. The staff report indicates the lack of
information on density and interaction between communities and uses. These are things that are done at
the time of zoning. The applicant views the code as a way to implement the Comprehensive Plan. The
applicant's approach is a simple form change on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map from
agricultural to agricultural and resident urban scale. The applicant has never mentioned MUD nor is that
their intention to be MUD. They view this as unnecessary. Staff would like this characterized as a MUD.
A time line was presented for the entire proposal. Public Works has made strategic roadways in the
county and this is important due to two roadways being a part of this. This evidences intent for the
roadways to carry large amounts of traffic. In 2004 the Board of County Commissioners adopted the
Resource Colorado Metropolitan Districts. That Districts primary function is to develop water resources
and make them available to development and municipalities. One of the requests by the Board of County
Commissioners at that time was to make that water available to Weld County. Pioneer Metropolitan
Districts were approved and they are conditional on this plan. That was evident to the applicant that there
was a desire to continue the possibilities for the corridor and urban development and should the
Comprehensive Plan be changed to acknowledge that. The PUD, Conceptual Plan, Change of Zone,
Final Plan, Preliminary Plat and Final Plat all will come before the Planning Commission or Board of
County Commissioners. There is no intention to plat the area at once, it will be in phases. The first phase
home would be available in late 2008 or early 2009. The future land use plan will emphasize a triangle
design that recognized Keenesburg and Hudson. The Land Use Map is not structural or a MUD. This
coincides with what the Comprehensive Plan states can be done. It allows the specific color. The
densities cannot be labeled at this time they are left to the PUD process and those documents. This land
use map indicates they want to preserve all irrigated agricultural land use and modify the rest to be
residential. The PUD process will bring forwards the landscaping and uses along with the location of
schools and park. All of this is consistent with the PUD process. This is not allowed in the Comprehensive
Plan. The key element of the amendment is to keep the water in Weld County. This will also sustain
irrigated farm ground with approximately 1441 acres that will remain in agricultural production. This will
also accommodated for urban development along the 1-76 corridor. Growth will occur and come up this
corridor; it has already been deemed prime for development especially due to the location to airport, and
E-470. This will also strengthen the retail of Keenesburg and Hudson. The towns indicated to them they
did not want additional commercial in this development since it would take away from their possibilities.
There will be a regional answer to sewer and water with an augmentation source. There have been
discussion with towns and they conserve a larger area along with the capacity to serve more. The need
for an amendment is due to the ever changing circumstances and conditions. The time is now for a
development of this nature to promote adequate planning in the area. This is time for this to begin and
this is a great location for the job growth located at Denver International Airport(DIA). There is the talk of
4
additional jobs coming to the area. This allows for larger treatment in the area. There are other needs
that direct growth to this area. The applicant has a report from Leaser and Company that speaks to the
amount of growth that will be in this area. There will be 30,000 new units in the greater Denver area and
this includes Weld County. Southern Weld County will capture 30-35%of the residential growth. Pioneer
will capture 35% of the Southern Weld County share (233-735 units annually). The county commissioned
Leland Associates to do a study and their report also indicated there will be growth, the amount may differ.
In the grand scheme Pioneer will only account for a small share of the total growth. The Comprehensive
Plan is founded on two goals. One goal is to preserve the agricultural heritage and encourage
development where appropriate. The Comprehensive Plan reads extensively on where appropriate. The
Pioneer agricultural component is a result of the urban designation. This generates best management
practices that will reduce conflict with other urban uses and progressive irrigation will enhance the
agricultural and evolve to be a better crop. This will encompass approximately 1500 acres. The applicant
addressed sprawl by stating it was compared as an inefficient use of land. The lot splits that are occurring
are not efficient. Large tracks of land split into smaller and fewer lots are harder to provide services to.
The urban development component rests on phrase"where urban infrastructure is currently available or
reasonably obtainable." The districts that Pioneer will provide will encompass that statement as shown in
a slide. According to staff urban growth along 1-25 is the only spot where growth can happen.
Jeff Vogl, representative for applicant, provided additional information on the planning aspect. The
approach of this plan is to create sustainable environmental, economical, agricultural, social and physical
planning opportunities and solutions for the region. Also to establish strategic partnerships and alliances
at the regional level and develop an extensive community outreach process. They will evaluate and
coordinate planning issues related to land use, transportation, education, recreation, utilities and services
at the regional level. A complete residential community is not feasible or productive for the area. The
objective is for a sustainable community; this is not just about social needs. The most important element
is for the region. This project is not an all encompassing development but will utilize the surrounding
towns and compliment them. CR 22 dead ends at this property so there is a need for connectivity. There
are existing land use, agricultural and riparian corridors. Once the PUD process begins more detailed
information will be presented. A Smart Growth Planning Principle is for a diversity of housing. The intent
is to establish a residential land use designation that will include a"diversity of housing types"for the
region. Establish a residential land use designation that will support retail and employment centers that are
to be primarily located in Hudson and Keenesburg. Establish a residential land use designation that will
include regional and community services such as parks, open space, schools, cultural venues and utility
services. Establish an agricultural land use designation that will sustain valuable agricultural land for the
future. Prior to any suggestions the applicant first looked at the agricultural lands and what was
sustainable in the area. The agricultural land also presents opportunities for future uses. This is
integrating agricultural with urban development in a responsible way. The applicant wanted to design a
land use that would provide for key transportation corridors and connections for the region. Smart Growth
Principles will be addressed in each of the PUD processes that will be applied for. Those principles will
include the enhancement and preservation of Natural Resources, balanced and sustainable community
for the region, cluster residential development, a sense of place, community theme, open space, School
District, dedication to enhanced environmental resources, public facilities and the transportation system
integration. Connectivity is large and has already begun to be addressed. Streets are great pedestrian
corridors. Pioneer's urban land use component will consist of residential designation that anticipates
diversity of housing, single-family and multi-family uses, residential designation that includes
neighborhood level commercial/retail opportunities and commercial/retail employment development will be
encouraged to locate in Keenesburg, Hudson and Ft. Lupton. The triangle containing this proposal along
with Keenesburg and Hudson provides a basic description of the area and what is being focused upon.
Jack Ruetzel continued with additional information on the proposal. Pioneer has a legal and financial
ability to provide a full range of urban services; including water and sewer service to the future residents.
There are several opportunities over the next several years to address each component individually. Staff
is asking for additional detail and those districts have been approved to the Board of County
Commissioners. This development will create additional burdens on services in the area. The proposal
creates a law enforcement agency for this property to help provide services in the area. This creates an
additional tax over and above the required level. The school district will have dedicated sites. The
applicant has done a capital facility foundation in other areas and this is a developer funded program to
fund the shortfall between houses being built and the taxes for capitol facilities. This intent is to not leave
5
the school districts in the deficit condition. The applicant has petitioned to be included in one of the two
existing fire protection districts and the Metropolitan Districts have an overlay tax that will help in providing
services. There has been a great deal of time dealing with the financial ability of the property. At full
build-out there will be a small surplus but the Leland report states a deficit. The assumptions by the
Leland could be the reasons for the differences. Leland took a per capita of services and split this among
just Weld County residents. Some of the Weld County services are enjoyed by those in the cities as well.
The Board of County Commissioners has already conditionally approved the districts. The regional
component to this proposal will include water and sewer and they will be available to others in the area.
The districts will participate in regional traffic improvements to CR 49, CR 22 and Hwy 52. There have
been several community outreach events. The applicant intends to be a part of the community for long
time and it is important to reach out and answer the questions now. The applicant also commits to do this
in the future. The applicant is requesting to modify the land use map to show urban residential and
agricultural. The applicant does not feel there is a need to make a new MUD. A regional plan in this
corridor will occur and the applicant will participate. The plan must include Keenesburg, Hudson and
address regional issues. The applicant feels they can be a better player with urban designation and
legally the Comprehensive Plan allows for this.
Doug Ochsner asked where Pioneer is coming from. In planning the development, some of the benefits
will go to the surround municipalities as far as commercial retail and sales tax and why is this being done
in the county and not as a part of a town. Mr. Paulson indicated that the amount of water that will be
moved and the cost associated with this the towns would be unable to handle this ($30 million
approximately). The applicant prefers to bring the infrastructure through the special districts to the regions
without burdening the current population. Then if Hudson and Keenesburg decision to annex it would
make more sense. The applicant is not saying they do not want to be annexed but in order to get the
growth going, the county needs to be applied to.
Michael Miller asked for clarification on the seven districts and what they address. Mr. Reutzel stated that
six finance districts are geographic areas. There is one regional district that is the focal point for the water
and sewer. Each one of the districts, when the time comes, will finance the next district. This is a phased
approach that will minimize the amount of infrastructure at any time so not to get ahead of demand. This
also protects the residences within each district so they do not have to pay for uses they do not enjoy. Mr.
Paulson stated the districts are laid out in growth nodes as well as geographic areas. Once the phase is
completed the residences will be in charge of the board in that district and they will allow for future growth
in the next phase. Mr. Miller asked if the water and sewer will be independent from the other districts. Mr.
Reutzel stated that district will own the transportation. The regional is strictly for water and sewer service.
The road will be finance through the individual districts also.
Paul Branham asked about the district that was only one acre in size. Mr. Paulson stated this is a primary
district that will contract for the water and sewer for the phases. Each geographical area will utilize this
district for their water and sewer. The one acre size is defined as not being able to build on and have
bonding capacity. Mr. Reutzel stated the developer wants make sure they keep control over this district so
there can be no future problems with regards to the completion of the remaining districts.
Roy Spitzer asked why the applicant did not seek annexation in a phased plan so the financial burden
would not have to be absorbed all at once. Mr. Paulson stated that the 30 million dollars was a start up
before any services were to be in the area. With there being no rooftops it would be difficult and
unreasonable to ask Keenesburg or Hudson to absorb that expense. The overall budget 180-200 million at
build out. The phases are done to get all the parks, trails and amenities in. The initial investment is huge.
Mr. Reutzel stated they municipalities are not within a three mile area. The municipalities are not there
even if they would be willing to annex. This will be a part of the county for years to come or until the
municipalities can accommodate and handle the size. This is 5600 acres with one owner and that allow
for some clout to assist in the development of the area in the future. Growth will come and this is an
opportunity to get ahead of the process.
Tom Holton asked if the districts were coved by TABOR. Mr. Reutzel stated they were. Mr. Holton asked
about the powers of eminent domain. Mr. Reutzel stated they are in compliance with the Weld County
policy. Should the law change then so will the power. Mr. Paulson stated the Board of County
Commissioners adopted various restrictions for special districts. One restriction was there was a need for
6
public notice if eminent domain was to be done and beyond that if the county objected thee would need to
be a county hearing.
Chad Auer asked for clarification on the term regional and if that addressed more than just Weld County.
Mr. Reutzel stated it was inclusive of Weld County and the northern region. Mr.Auer asked about the
proximity of the Superslab. Mr. Paulson stated the problem with the Superslab is there was no public
forum for discussion, the applicant is not supporters. Mr. Reutzel stated this is not needed for the job
growth and for this development. The opportunities are towards DIA.
Michael Miller asked Mr. Mueller about the conditions that were placed on the approved Metropolitan
Districts. Mr. Mueller stated it was for textual corrections; an example would be to define the scope of
inclusion of CR 49. It also asked that the applicant submit an addendum reflecting what the county
consultant had shown as growth projections. This would not be part of the service plan but would be
additional information. Mr. Morrison stated that the service plan is to be revised to state that the proposed
districts is prohibited from issuing debt prior to the approval of a Comprehensive Plan amendment
substantially similar to the land use designation set forth in the Comprehensive Plan amendment
submitted October 19. They have to get through this process before they can issue any debt. As Mr.
Mueller stated it has to be revised to incorporate an alternative financial plan which would present the
impact of 30 year absorption of the projected buildout of development within the service area. The service
area shall be revised to state the control of the proposed service district will be transitioned to the
financing district by way of an Intergovernmental Agreement when all the public improvements necessary
to serve the service area have been financed and constructed. The point of that is that as the phases
proceed there is developer control but as those go online those become controlled by the residents and
electors of that and eventually all of the districts. Eventually all the districts will transition to a residential
elector control as opposed to a developer control. The service plan needs to state that the district will
have the ability to participate in the financing and construction of any offsite transportation or road
improvements. The Board of County Commissioners wants clarification of additional powers to participate
in off site transportation. These would be ones that are external to the actual district and development.
Tom Holton asked about the water and if it was all coming from wells. Mr. Paulson stated they will move
water from Lost Creek designated basin to this area. A designated basin is replenishable annually. This
basin runs from Bennett up to the Platte. The basins are recharged annually by precipitation and snow
melt. The basin is managed by a ground water management district that is charged by statute to manage
the resource so it is renewable. Mr. Holton asked how they are going to protect the other farmers that are
not included. Mr. Paulson stated the court decree adjudicates the right to move the water out of the basin.
The amount that was allowed was what would have left the valley in a crop or by evapotranporation. The
applicant was able to get this right by taking a decrease in what was the average annual depletion of the
water on the crops in all the farms. They have also included a margin of errors. Mr. Holton asked about
metering. Mr. Paulson stated that the decree requires them to meter all the wells. Mr. Holton asked what
the mitigation plan was if they should affect the wells. Mr. Paulson stated the mitigation was included in
the decree by the amount of water they were allowed to export. Mr. Holton asked about actual mitigation.
Mr. Paulson stated that they have been funding a study conducted by the USGS to determine if there is
any additional ability to recharge the aquifer. Mr. Holton asked about the affluent and whether it was non-
potable. Mr. Paulson stated it will meet the discharge standards. Since it is coming from a designated
basin it is in addition to the water supply of the Box Elder basin and can be available for augmentation to
the wells or recycled. Mr. Holton does not understand the 23%from Lost Creek. Mr. Paulson stated the
calculations for water for the number of homes is 2500 a/f of replenishable water with another 14-1600 a/f
to be put on parks and open space that is recycled water. Some of the water will be available to Box Elder
Basin as augmentation and some will be for recycling. Once the PUD process is begun it will determined
whether to augment with Box Elder or central wells. Mr. Morrison stated the section addresses all
available sources of water not just for the urban development. The summary includes the existing
irrigation wells. Mr. Paulson stated he was addressing the urban uses and where it would come from.
There is an entire inventory of resources available. The plan is to use the water in several ways to
augment the uses in Box Elder.
Paul Branham asked Mr. Mueller about the response from Hudson indicating a problem if there are
several districts with several boards. The communication could be an issue. Mr. Mueller stated there is
logic in having multiple phased districts. One district may by vote decide not to have additional districts.
7
This would shut the entire future phasing down. Hudson is making comments for municipal services
verses districts. The problem with not including into existing municipal services is the possibility of getting
a different mill levy. Once annexed into a municipality there could be several levies associated with the
different districts. Mr. Branham asked if it was common to have this many. Mr. Mueller stated it was not
uncommon for something of this scale. For example, a district four could be built-out, but without a
separate district five, infrastructure for the entire system might not be adequately financed.
Tom Holton asked if the applicant had done any of these like this in the area. Mr. Reutzel stated they had
done Bromley Park in Brighton, and it was not in the city at the time but has since been annexed. It was
six to seven districts in the late 80's and they were initially in Adams County. A master plan of this size is
not out of the ordinary due to the process. Growth will pay its own way which is the principle of the district
since they are taxing themselves.
Michael Miller asked what will happen should the first phase go in and not many homes are purchased.
Will the homeowners be responsible for the initial start up. Mr. Reutzel stated the county policies put a
mill levy cap that can not be exceeded to retire the debt. The bond investors understand that policy. Mr.
Morrison stated it was 40 mills but the overall county policy is 50 mills plus 15 for an operation of
maintenance. No district can exceed 65. Purchasers of debt are the ones at risk, not the owners. This
was part of the metropolitan district policies. Mr. Reutzel stated there is a cap that protects property
owner.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application.
Marvin Wade,superintendent of school, indicated the school district's concerns. There has been discussion
regarding the information provided. At this time the school is opposed to this because of the number of
homes and students. There is projected to be 10,000 homes which create a need for 7,500 students. They
are now at 2000 students. Pioneer has agreed to meet with them and revisit the method for shortfall. The
issues have not been resolved but a commitment has been given to address. The district will oppose until
those issues are resolved.
Bruce Fitzgerald asked if there would be major turmoil if this was approved. Mr.Wade stated it would at this
point ant time. Things need to be in place now to prepare for those students. Mr. Fitzgerald asked about the
school district boundaries. Mr. Wade stated it was 480 sq miles. The schools would include Hudson and
Keenesburg and the transportation is an issue at a minimum until schools are built in the area. Mr. Wade
added that the financial shortfall is an issue. The method of calculating the shortfall included the applicant
using a residential assessment value that is different than what is in Colorado. The formula overestimated the
revenue that would be coming into the school district. This will be corrected, but nothing is in writing.
Chad Auer asked what the trigger points were for a new school. Is there an amount of over-capacity that has
to be met before a school is done? Mr.Wade stated it was 25%over,but the school currently has some room
to grow. The short term is addressed with modulars.
Jim Landeck, representative for Hudson, indicated their concerns. There was some discussion earlier about
the primary goal and objective to try to urbanize developments like this. Hudson has annexed to CR49 and l-
76. The real issues deal with municipal services in the long term and the impact this will have on county
services. Rooftops do not provide enough property tax revenue to pay for county services. Hudson relies on
county services for assistance. This will negatively impact the town along with decreased sheriff protection.
Bruce Fitzgerald asked for clarification on the lack of law enforcement. Mr. Landeck indicated they contract
through the Weld County Sheriff. Mr. Fitzgerald asked if this would be annexed. Mr. Landeck stated that it
could not be done all at once but a phased approach could be accommodated. An annexation requires the
developers to bring the resources to the table when they annex. Infrastructure improvements would also need
to be done. Phasing is what is typically seen. The town would need to review what the applicant is bringing
and what that benefit to the town would be. Mr. Fitzgerald asked Mr. Landeck if he sees the town as being a
partner in this. Mr. Landeck indicated the applicant has promised additional discussions but there have been
no commitments to date. Mr. Fitzgerald asked if the town sees itself as a commercial or employment center.
Mr. Landeck would like to know how houses at that distance create employment centers in Hudson. The idea
of development likes to have shopping and retail convenient. It would make sense to have centers of retail in
the housing units. It would be more sensible for Hudson to get the sales tax from this to maintain the
8
services.
Roy Spitzer asked where Hudson had annexed to. Mr.Landeck stated that was approximately two miles away
at the intersection of CR 49 and 1-76.
Michael Miller asked about the current status of Hudson's domestic water or will the Metro Districts benefit
from that? Mr. Landeck stated there is a long-term need but it will need to be a mixed portfolio. The town is
currently using CBT water and alluvial water that is treated in their system, but they will be looking at
alternative sources. The applicant has some creative sources that they are bringing. All of this could be
incorporated to Hudson as well as Keenesburg. Mr. Miller asked if it was any benefit to Hudson by this
application that has not been shown through Resource Colorado. Mr. Landeck stated there are potential
benefits down the road including the development of a waste water facility along Box Elder Creek. Anything of
this magnitude gives opportunity.
Tom Holton asked how this will affect things with regards to growth even if there is a phased approach. Mr.
Landeck stated it will impact Hudson, but the question is whether the initial growth will draw away from their
tax base rather than enhance it. If the town loses county services how will this be made up with limited taxes?
This could have a large impact and the concern is in its present form, it will have a negative impact.
Mark Gray, mayor of Keenesburg, indicated their concerns. They have some of the same concerns as
Hudson. A development of this size brings concerns for their Planning Commission and town board. This will
cause the same strain on county services that are relied upon. The applicants have worked with the town as
far as the town's immediate needs for water. The Planning Commission and board are concerned about
growth and impact on traffic to 1-76. If this moves forward they have worked with the applicant on how to
address the possible concerns. The question is how the towns draw the commercial growth to 1-76 corridor. If
the rooftops will generate jobs and sales and sales tax, it will be beneficial. The partnership will be down the
road if this is what occurs. In the Keenesburg Comprehensive Plan there is commercial along 1-76. A small
portion of east side of Pioneer is in Keenesburg's three mile growth plan. The board has not made a decision
for or against this proposal it has just indicated their concerns.
Bruce Fitzgerald asked if the town would annex any or all of this development. Mr. Gray stated there are
potentials since this is within the three mile growth plan but it would not be a simple annexation and would
need to be phased. Mr. Fitzgerald asked if Keenesburg felt they were a partner in this proposal. Mr. Gray
stated they are not with the Pioneer communities with regards to traffic. The town is in talks with Resource
Colorado for the purchase of water. They did address a 208 facility, and a regional treatment facility could
help the area down the road.
Sharon Krogen, resident of Keenesburg, provided her concerns. A map was provided of the Superslap
Highway. The highway is a twelve mile wide path from Wellington east to Weld County crossing south to
Pueblo. The Superslad is not dead but is looking at different ways to continue. Mrs. Krogens stated she was
curious why the toll road was given no thought. There should be concerns with this and if not why? There is a
concern with emergency services and them being volunteers who have full-time jobs. There is a concern for
this especially if the applicant is not going to add services of this nature for ten years.
George Mathewson,resident of Brighton,indicated his concern with a dry lake in the area along the Box Elder
Creek and whether it will be a pond for sludge sewage?
Bob Grant, Keenesburg Trustee, indicated concerns. It is the same distance from Keenesburg to Greeley as it
is to Longmont. There is a frustration with the County's views for the south county. Pioneer has met with the
town and some really good work has been done. With the filing of Calpine bankruptcy,Keenesburg lost out on
several things. A plan that addresses the issue of the local area is what is needed. The kids need to be
provided for both with jobs and homes in the area. Mr. Grant believes that both groups should be given the
opportunity to get into the detail of the development. The school district is an important feature that must be
addressed. The kids need to be focused on. Pioneer must get to know the town. Everyone must work
together to get a proposal to have the kids have education and jobs in the area.
Chad Auer asked about the school bond issue and what it entails. Mr. Grant stated the bond did not
encompass the growth from Pioneer. The funds renovated the old Weld Central High School into a Junior
9
High School and new high school. There is capacity for growth, but not to this extent. The three towns are
close to finalizing agreements addressing contribution fees for each home to offset the expenses. Mr.Auer
stated that the bond predates this application. Mr. Grant indicated it does.
Robert Swank,resident of Keenesburg,provided his concerns. This is being viewed as a farmer that does not
want this close to him. There are concerns with machinery going down and there is no room for them. The
farmers are leaving the area due to the development. There is no way for the kids can buy land since it is so
expensive. The water is a concern and how this will enhance Weld County agricultural by drying farms in
Prospect Valley then pumping the water to the sand for lawn? Why is the water not taken from Box Elder
Creek? The applicant does not seem to be telling the whole story. This will hurt farmer but help some
businessmen.
Sandy Prowly, resident of Hudson who owns property adjacent to this indicated her concerns with children and
the capacity of the schools. Times are changing and she does not blame people for selling since thy have to
do what they can to survive. There are children that are accustomed to the small town and the atmosphere it
provides. This is a huge change in lifestyle by being larger than any community in the area. Ms.Prowly asked
for clarification on the commercial area. Ms. Prowly asked who will pay for the improvements to CR 49 and
CR 22 to make it a four lanes, taxpayer or Pioneer. There is a concern for the residents wanting a rural
lifestyle but not liking the smells associated with this. There is a concern for the financial end,who wants to
wait 20 years to get a return on an investment of 30 million? Why moving water from and not building on
those farms?
Lee Morrison stated the questions about the roadway should be addressed by the county. Financing for the
roads will be a combination of items. The strategic roadways are from the existing system while the roadways
that are a part of a subdivision will be proportionate to the developer of that subdivision. It would be
proportionate to the extent of existing traffic in the area. The special districts are authorized to include in their
powers the ability to provide financing for the additional roads. Frank Hempen,Public Works,added that if the
development has impacts on the county roadways the applicant will be expected to offset those affects and
they will be included in an agreement. At this stage Department of Public Works did not get into details but
are looking for short term details in the phasing and the impacts on how they will occur.
Larry Vargas, resident, asked whether CR 24 will be extended. Mr. Hempen stated there were no plans, at
this point, to extend CR 24. There may be some parts of this development that may need to expand.
John Martindale, Platteville resident, indicated his concerns. There is not a lot of agricultural east of
Keenesburg due to the lack of water. Farmers from Brighton to Greeley are on an 85% cutback on water.
There is no one else living with a pay cut. The only thing that is occurring is housing developments requiring
greenbelts that in turn require water. All of the water is being utilized while no water is made by the state.
The storage pits are for water that is going to Nebraska. Where will this end and come to, this will run
agricultural out of business.
Bonnie Mackintosh, resident of Keenesburg, indicated traffic and dust concerns. If this goes in there are no
plans for CR 18 for dust abatement. The traffic and dust will also increase on CR 55. There needs to be
something done with the roadways and this development. Why are there no schools within this development.
Why put this in that location?
Lee Morrison indicated it will be required to provide land or cash-in-lieu for schools for capitol improvements.
The discussion the applicant was making was a further way of addressing the effects on the economics of the
school district. The county cannot require impact fees or operations enhancement fees. The applicant is
intending to make an agreement with the district to address the concerns that the county cannot require. The
county can only require the dedication of the land and this would happen. The county requires on the school
district to do the projections as to the numbers. This will either be shown on the plat as a dedication or cash-
in-lieu. The county still holds the final in that they must provide the dedication or such.
Tom Betts, resident, indicated his question on CR 22 and CR 49 and will this be the only two accesses to the
development? The entire area is agricultural and the only reason the applicant is keeping the agricultural
areas is that is where the water is located. What does this development have to offer to people to come to this
area? What happens to run-off from the roof tops? Box Elder Creek will not handle this. What happens if the
10
metered wells use too much,then what do they intend to do? They have water that no one else has. Will the
water be offered to Hudson and Keenesburg. Mr. Betts is opposed to this.
Wood Eppleseimer, indicated his concerns with the planning of the property. This is an opportunity to do
something right from the beginning. The water is an issue though. He has metered a new well and it is
pumping 2.2 a/f to 2.5 a/f on normal crop rotations, depending on the crop in the field. The transport that is
being allowed is 0.95 a/f of transport. The crops with average rotation has 1.5 a/f of water that disappears
from the basin due to crops and dissipation. The basin will benefit from the transport due to the amount being
transported being less that what would actually be used on the ground. It is not fortunate to dry agricultural
land but it will benefit the basin. If the affluent is treated properly and in a good location it could be brought
back to the area which will be a benefit. The consumptive use is what takes water out of the basin for the
year.
Roy Spitzer asked if this was Lost Creek Basin and if the amount transported out was .95 a/f and the average
uses was 1.5 a/f. Mr. Eppleseimer stated that was correct.
Discussion ensued in the public area with regard to consumption.
Wood Eppleseimer defined consumptive use as how much the crop takes out of the basin that year.
Doug Wilson,neighbor to this application, indicated his concerns to the current plan. He bought his land and
relied on the existing Comprehensive Plan for the agricultural area and for it to stay that way. Growth should
be next to existing growth as in the current plan. This is not a proper use of this land since it lacks
consistency. The credibility of land will be changed to fit the need for the amount of money. This will put a
strain on the services in the area. This may be overcome with time, but the concern is the change in the
original zoning of the area.
Linda Shonamen, neighbor,stated a year was taken to develop the existing Comprehensive Plan. It is a huge
concerns that someone can come and change it with no public meetings. She is not satisfied that the tax
base will pay for the services. The USGS's study will not be done until next year. There are others who are
concerned about the water and wells. The concern is how those wells will be monitored or read. The water
will leave the district but who will enforce or monitor them? There needs to be definite conversations
regarding the water. The water issue is not a definite and without knowing this there should be no way to
move forward.
Chair Closed Public Portion of meeting.
Jack Reutzel, representative for the applicant, addressed the concerns brought forward by the public. The
concerns seemed to be focused on transportation,schools,county roads,continued agricultural operation and
reliance on the plan. Schools will be built on the site. The Comprehensive Plan does not allow them not to.
They will continue to work with the district. Schools on site are a better marketable aspect and a benefit for
the region. With regards to transportation, it is hard not knowing what the land use will be and what roads will
be affected. The applicant will make improvements to roads they cause and impacts on and others that Public
Works indicates a need for. The applicant has strived to maintain all of the current agricultural land within the
Pioneer development that is being irrigated. During the zoning process they will offer some legal ways to
ensure that the lands remain in agricultural either through conservation easements or by waiving certain rights.
This is a Comprehensive Plan level. The applicant is relying on the existing Comprehensive Plan. It is a well
written document. The Comprehensive Plan allows for development in areas where urban services are
reasonably obtainable. The applicant did not take into account the Superslab nor address it. This highway is
dead or a long way in the future,so it is not relied upon for development. With regards to the dry lake,it will be
addressed at the PUD stage in the area it affects. The concept of drying agricultural land and pushing out
farmers is difficult to address. There will always be a range of emotions when there are such a large number
of properties affected. This is a corridor in transition whether it is Pioneer that does this or someone else.
Change is happening in this area. This corridor is a prime location for DIA for its employment. The applicant
will protect the agricultural opportunities within the Pioneer development.
Chris Paulson stated this is a large undertaking. If there is not this type of land use as an opportunity then
what is available is scattered development which leads to no dust abatement or impact fees to help assist in
11
the services. Splitting the ground without the possibilities of obtaining services is not efficient. If the area does
not have a mass of homes no water or sewer can be brought forward in an organized fashion. If this plan is
not approved there will still be sand hills with no agricultural and no one can afford to continue to augment
farm production in the area. With the approval of Resource Colorado this applicant chose to apply the
standards that are in existence in the southern part of the county. The plan is to preserve active agricultural
and to make urban dwellings available where the services can be obtained. This can only be done if there are
enough rooftops to be able to afford the infrastructure to move the water. If the water is not moved to this area
it may not stay in Weld County. This is an opportunity for the county to do this right from the beginning. The
applicant has intentions on getting the agreements once this is approved. Mr. Reutzel stated that the
commercial acreage also accounts for parking and landscaping.
Tom Holton asked where the water was coming from. Brad Simons, Gateway American Resources, stated
that the application has three components. One component is the Denver basin water onsite and underlying
properties within Prospect Valley,the second is the Box Elder alluvium. This currently has ten wells that are
utilized for agricultural production. The third component is Lost Creek Basin water. There is an option with
water holding company on a portion of the water that is currently permitted to pump and export from the basin
for other uses. There have been some preliminary alignment studies but obtaining right-of-way is premature
at this stage. The water supply resource report is something that will be finalized at preliminary plan stage.
That report requires the applicant to assess the potential for impact and identify means of mitigating those
impacts. That report must be approved by the State Engineer. There are 37 wells in Lost Creek Basin which
will dry up 5006 acres.
Tom Holton asked why the pipeline that follows along Hwy 66 and Platteville were not discussed as opposed
to drying up the farm ground. Mr. Simons stated the issue is of ownership of water. The applicant has
renewable supply for the Lost Creek water. There is the ability to augment withdrawls from the Box Elder
Alluvium and there are rights to the Denver Basin property. They did not consider water from other areas as a
reliable source of water for this. Hudson has a limited capacity through the pipeline. This is the reason for the
alluvial wells in Box Elder. They need to treat the water before use. The current demand cannot be met with
the current supply from the facility.
Michael Miller asked staff why the difference between what the applicant wants with a change to the map and
what staff wants with a MUD. Mr. Mueller stated he was prepared to speak to all the various comments and
questions that the applicant made including that one. If the board would like to go through that would be fine.
Mr. Mueller would also answer any unanswered questions that came from the public portion. Staff
acknowledges the work and investment that goes into a proposal of this nature. This is an important effort.
The characterization regarding sprawl by staff as being an inefficient use of land refers to the density of the
proposal. Staffs recommendation does not suggest that no plan for this area would be compliant with the
Comprehensive Master Plans goals and policies. The density of 2-6 dwelling units per acre is not considered
efficient land use. It does not allow for maximum use of infrastructure,water,sewer,road and schools. Smart
Growth might come out of a detailed process and as the details are brought forward. Smart Growth includes
the communities in the area. Urban infrastructure remains one criterion for the location of urban areas. If this
was used by itself the entire county could bring services to it. The MUD designation is a mechanism that
attempts accommodate the application. The suggestion of an MUD was an attempt by staff to accommodate
the proposal as presented. The designation between urban and non urban is not defined in the manner
suggested by the applicant in the Comprehensive Plan. The proposal the applicant presents utilizes the
greater Denver area and some of the findings were the reason a separate study was commissioned by Mr.
Warden. There are critical components to each application and water is always a key component. The use of
water is a function of demand. Future demand will determine whether it will stay in Weld County rather used
elsewhere. There is no clear information on what kind of trades for water there is, rather it comes from the
Platte or not. It is all driven by demand. Another key component was accommodating urban uses along I-76.
The character and type of growth is what staff looks at. This can assist in the commercial/retail growth of
Keenesburg and Hudson as long as there is no direct competition with the towns. An agreement would need
to be made between the municipalities. The commercial aspects need to be cleared up. The need for this
amendment was defined by employment as indicated by DIA. Staff would indicate that this is a significant
distance away. Residential does not pay for itself. The need is based on assumption of certain capture rates,
but Mr. Warden's analysis does not agree that 35% of 35% is realistic capture rate for this area. A region-
wide comprehensive plan can facilitate the creation of trails,thereby not allowing them to be in pieces and not
connected. The applicant alludes to urban development being the triangle between the site, Hudson and
12
Keenesburg. However, urban development is not present in this location and would bring forward in the future
the question of how the existing residents would become involved.
Bruce Fitzgerald asked about the MUD in the Del Camino area and it being allowed to grow over years.
Would that advantage be allowed for in this MUD? Mr. Mueller stated that if the Planning Commission
approves this staff has some Conditions of Approval and Development Standards. The current expansion
policies for the I-25 MUD include adjacency and the MUD is allowed to expand. This proposal includes
language that is not similar to this. Staff is recommending no language be included at this point for expansion.
The language currently proposed by the applicant states there are other properties within the service area
(within the potential 208 boundaries)are located near the corridor which may include other property owners
who are desirous of amending their designation. The change from agricultural to urban would be anticipated
and will be considered, if one will-serve letter is proven that water is provided,financial plan is provided and a
map showing proximity is provided. If those four things are met then the area will be deemed for urban
development. This is what they are proposing. Staff believes this is too broad and rather than work through
the policies it should be omitted. If Planning Commission approves this it would be a condition that staff
would like to review.
Doug Ochsner asked for clarification on the MUD classification and rather this was the only possible way for
them to continue. Mr. Mueller stated staffs effort to put this in a MUD was a way to accommodate the
request. A criterion to amend the Comprehensive Plan suggests that urban area will be where there is an
UGB, municipality, or within the MUD, under the current plan this would be the 1-25 MUD. Staff believes that
this does not meet any of these criteria and the best way to so was to create a MUD. Mr.Morrison added that
the creation of a MUD is not the only way to accomplish an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan. Planning
staff feels that this would be the best way but it is not a legal requirement. The applicant is requesting to
amend the existing map. The existing MUD has a history. When the MUD was first created it was a map with
conceptual land uses with alternatives but there were no design guidelines. Over time policies and criteria
have been incorporated. When it was first started it was similar in concept as to what the applicant is
requesting. Mr. Miller clarified that the applicant is requesting the Comprehensive Plan map be amended to
show urban residential rather than just agricultural. Mr. Morrison clarified that the vote would be on whether to
amend the Comprehensive Plan. If this is done then the decision needs to be whether the Department of
Planning Services staff approach which is the creation of the MUD or the applicants approach for the map
amendment is appropriate.
Monica Mika, Department of Planning Services, provided some clarification. There are factors and one of
them is the applicant referencing the future land use map. The recommendation from the applicant is to take
the map and incorporate it into the Comprehensive Plan. Staff has an issue with the fact there are no future
land use maps in the county. There is one area of the county that is designated as Structural Land Use and
that is the MUD area. When the applicant met with staff on their proposal for an area recognized in Weld
County for this type of growth it made sense to try and determine how to incorporate into the existing
Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan then talks about how to define urban and non-urban. This
section states what is to be done if considered urban. Chapter 26 is the MUD area and that is where the
standards,rules and regulations are at. Chapter 26 was a part of the Comprehensive Plan but was removed
to be more recognizable due to the increased need. Both chapters are tied together. Making both of these
recognized would address all future issues. Throughout the PUD process the criteria states that the plan must
be consistent with all the Weld County code chapters. It made sense to have a defined code for future
references. There is no process on how to create a new MUD but there are guidelines on how to modify the
existing. Ms. Mika does not want to recreate a whole process for every time a property owner would like to do
something different.
Chad Auer asked when the Comprehensive Plan is due for an update. Ms. Mika stated an update is due next
year, 2007. Mr. Holton asked at what point you make a new MUD in the corridor. Ms. Mika stated that if the
Planning Commission agrees that this is bigger than a subdivision, the only thing it can be called is a mixed
use community or area.
Jack Reutzel indicated that sprawl can be considered at 2-6 units per acres. Changing the future land use
map or going through a MUD are both sanctioned approaches that amend the plan. What is required of the
Planning Commission is to have the applicant demonstrate the elements necessary to change the land use
from agricultural to urban/ agricultural. If the response is yes due to the impending growth, the
13
Comprehensive Plan should be changed. Then the question is how. At that point there is a difference of
opinion. The threshold is if the elements have been shown by the applicant to agree to their request to amend
the map. All the details in the Comprehensive Plan will be addresses as part of the PUD. The questions that
are being asked now will be better addressed at the PUD stage where specific details can be given. If this is
not allowed to expand then how is the county going to accommodate the commercial growth for the 1-76
corridor. In amending the land use map it is gives the ability to look at agricultural,commercial,residential and
industrial.
Lee Morrison commented that this is a legislative function so there is more freedom on how to break down the
formability's of the application and voting process. A vote could be taken in general to determine whether it
should go forward or not. Should the vote be in the affirmative then the format can better be determined.
Planning Commission could also provide staff with further direction. If there is reason to continue then
consider the application. Mr. Fitzgerald asked if this was based on staff recommendations. Mr. Morrison
stated a vote of yes or no can be done without regard to the details on the application. This is not a decision
between staff and applicant positions; it is whether or not the Comprehensive Plan should change. An
affirmative vote would constitute more discussion on the recommendation and possible direction of staff, a
denial vote would not need to be discussed in detail since the Planning Commission agrees with staffs
recommendation. Mr. Morrison added that if a recommendation were to be done a final vote would need to be
done. If the vote is for approval then the format on how to continue would need to be addressed. The final will
need to be in the form of a resolution.
Chad Auer stated his reservation rests on the existing Comprehensive Plan and the intense public exercise
that the Plan took to revise. In order to change the Comprehensive Plan there needs to be a wide range of
public input. This is similar to a public hearing process but the foundation for that is people have the ability to
participate in a comprehensive way. While this is one public process this is not how the Comprehensive Plan
should be amended or changed. At that time the input would include not only Pioneers interests but additional
citizens who would like their voice heard. The applicant has an interest with a great deal of investment in this
proposal. This should change in next years Comprehensive Plan review.
Michael Miller stated growth will occur in the corridor. With this application there have been references to
development taking place where services can be reasonably obtainable. Mr. Miller did not like the language
when it was brought forward during the last Comprehensive Plan review and this was the reasoning. The
infrastructure is not reasonably obtained in this case. This development is being done on grand scale simply
because it is the only way to get services to the area. This application is not appropriate for area and will harm
Hudson and Keenesburg. It is not balanced with commercial or jobs. It is a matter of having 10,000 homes
that will commute to Denver everyday which is not good planning.
Roy Spitzer stated that growth will happen to 1-76 corridor but the applicant has a good application. Mr.Spitzer
is uncomfortable in amending the Comprehensive Plan for this. Primarily it has to do with the existing towns.
The developer must pursue agreements with the towns for a more regional approach. Reasonable
development in the corridor must be done and not be a detriment to the towns.
Paul Branham agrees that another MUD should not be created without a very broad process with extensive
public input. The problem is due to Pioneer's size; it is a mixed use community. It is not PUD but should be
considered as a MUD. There are a number of places, but this not an appropriate mix of uses. There is a
major concern with the deficit this will cause. Mr. Branham is not in support.
Doug Ochsner commented that the he is not opposed to changing the Comprehensive Plan but the only
individuals that attend the public meetings are those that it affects. The input from the public on specific
items such as this will be a smaller scale. The Planning Commission is in a position to invite input with this
case to help form the Comprehensive Plan. This hurdle to change the Comprehensive Plan has no affect on
his decision. According 22-2-100.B the infrastructure is reasonably obtainable which it is in this application.
The applicant has reached that whether it is a large subdivision as proposed and they can reasonable obtain
the services. The Planning Commission must say they meet that criterion. The fact they are bringing in
irrigation water from wells has been approved and it is transferable. It is feasible they can build a line for that
water somewhere else like Douglas County. In Section 22-1-150.7 it states the new residences will
adequately be served by social amenities. This is the main objection. The difference of five million dollar
deficit vs.the small fiscal projection of no deficit provides concern. If it is a deficit,that is huge burden on the
14
County. Mr. Ochsner stated there are several places he would like to see this continue. The one issue is the
deficit concern and to take traffic from the 1-25 corridor is a huge benefit.
Tom Holton states there are parts that bother him personally like moving water off of farms and drying ground.
The county needs to realize that the 1-25 corridor has been recognized and the 1-76 needs to be addressed.
There are too many unanswered questions from the municipalities and school districts at this point.
Bruce Fitzgerald stated Keenesburg has annexed to part of this area. If this proposal is over a 20 year period
it would not be hard for the municipalities to accommodate this rather than county. Mr. Fitzgerald would rather
see this in one of the cities and have them wrestle with this and come to an agreement.
Chad Auer moved that Case 2005-XX, be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners along with staff
comments with the Planning Commissions recommendation of denial. Michael Miller seconded the motion.
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. Roy
Spitzer,yes; Michael Miller,yes;Tom Holton,yes;Chad Auer,yes; Doug Ochsner,yes;Bruce Fitzgerald,yes;
Paul Branham, yes. Motion carried unanimously.
Doug Ochsner commented his agreeing to the approval with the one regret as was stated previously. There
are several unanswered questions, but those can be addressed.
Michael Miller commented he does not believe this application meets the standards of Section 22-2-20.D,
Section 22-2-20.F, Section 22-2-100.A or Section 22-2-100.F
Meeting adjourned at 7:15 p.m.
Re ectfully submitted
mn aCJ(C
Voneen Macklin
Secretary
15
Hello